Robert Frank at the Met & an audio interview

Cafe Art

A
Cafe Art

  • 4
  • 2
  • 34
Sciuridae

A
Sciuridae

  • 4
  • 2
  • 91
Takatoriyama

D
Takatoriyama

  • 6
  • 3
  • 115
Tree and reflection

H
Tree and reflection

  • 2
  • 0
  • 96

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,632
Messages
2,762,203
Members
99,425
Latest member
dcy
Recent bookmarks
1

Andrew Horodysky

I'm going next Sunday (will be seeing the Vermeer exhibition the same day); I'll write a few thoughts after...
 

fschifano

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
3,196
Location
Valley Strea
Format
Multi Format
Saw it the day it opened, then went back with an old friend who currently lives in California. It is well worth the time. Even his contact sheets are interesting. Take your time, and see it all.

I've also seen Vermeer's "The Milkmaid" a couple of times. That's one heck of a painting. The color, composition, and level of detail, are simply stunning. Don't forget to check out some of the other painting in the exhibit while you're there.
 

marcmarc

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
391
Format
Medium Format
I made a trip from LA to San Francisco to see this. I've always liked Frank, but I have a much greater admiration for him after seeing this exhibit. The contact sheets are worth the visit alone (and worth the purchase of the expanded edition of "Looking In").

What's interesting to note is that on the day me and my father went to SFMoMA to see the exhibit, there was also a Ansel Adams exhibit going on. I had no interest in seeing Adams. However I was intrigued to see that the Adams exhibit required an additional fee on top of the regular admission fee to the museum. The Frank exhibit did not. I guess the museum figured that Adams would be more popular and well known then Frank (for which they are probably correct) and therefore could cash in on this fact by charging extra. I know Adams has done a lot for photography and his status is well deserved, but I consider Frank to be a more important photographer for the huge impact "The Americans" has had on modern photography.
 

Andrew Horodysky

Saw it the day it opened, then went back with an old friend who currently lives in California. It is well worth the time. Even his contact sheets are interesting. Take your time, and see it all.

I've also seen Vermeer's "The Milkmaid" a couple of times. That's one heck of a painting. The color, composition, and level of detail, are simply stunning. Don't forget to check out some of the other painting in the exhibit while you're there.

Frank, we're on the same page.

I took my wife and older daughter to see both the Frank and Vermeer exhibitions (for my daughter, primarily the Vermeer paintings, because she just read "Chasing Vermeer" for her 5th grade class). The selected paintings on view were nothing short of beautiful. And, seeing them within the context of some of the artist's contemporaries' works was also enlightening. We participated in a related family orientation presented by the museum's education department.

Onto Robert Frank. I've been looking forward to seeing this collection ("The Americans") in its entirety for a long time. I was pleased to see the various earlier projects and "loose" series leading up to the Guggenheim-funded trips(s). Seeing first-hand, and up-close, related documents supporting the project -- contact sheets, original draft applications for the Guggenheim Fellowship, application edits by Walker Evans, personal letters hand-written to Evans from the road, drafts to the introduction by Jack Kerouac, and the various international incarnations of the book -- all proved to be academically exhilarating, as well.

The framed individual photographs hang in different dimensions, linearly throughout 3-4 rooms, creating a completely different experience from that of viewing the book. The book, for me, has the feel and experience of a moving picture (a flick) whereby one is guided through a succinct narrative -- scene -- only one picture at a time.

The exhibition is a reprieve from that, where one has the opportunity to take in image groups, lateral juxtapositions, discover individual details not revealed in book form, and witness (as if one's there with the photographer) the gritty disenfranchisement of the not-so-dreamy post-war years in this country, that could've only been seen through the eyes of a foreigner (although Frank arrived in the States in 1947, I think).

The rooms were a little crowded and stuffy, and flow a little confusing when following the series sequencing, but that's a very minor complaint (if one, at all). Nonetheless, I loved it. Should anyone here have the opportunity to visit this exhibition, do so. It's a jewel and rarity. I think it's also topical, in the sense that many of today's socio-political and cultural issues are reflected in photographs recorded more than fifty years ago. Like it or not, it's as if we, as Americans, are looking in the mirror, and not just being looked at. Go see it.

The recently reissued book, by Steidl, is lovely to hold and study. I bought it last year, in anticipation of visiting the exhibition. The reproductions are meticulously printed (as is just about everything published by Steidl), and sits on the shelf next to my Aperture edition of "The Americans" (visually, I prefer the former).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

paladin1420

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
96
Location
Northern New Jersey
Format
35mm
I got a chance to go to the met this week and saw both the Frank and Vermeer exhibitions. I was a bit more impressed with Vermeer, probably because those paintings are 350 years old versus 50 years old for the Frank prints. Also, I have no shot at ever producing anything with oil and canvas but I have done black and white prints myself and can view Frank’s results as certainly more reachable for me than Vermeer's.

I have not seen the book The Americans, but I did like the way the photos were arranged linearly throughout the exhibit.

I did have a small problem with the lighting in the room. As I viewed the works I always felt that I was fighting with reflections no matter what angle I tried. For most of the photos, viewing from directly in front put distracting reflections right in the middle of the photos.

Otherwise, it was certainly worth the trip in to see them.
 

John Jarosz

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
145
Location
Fairfax Iowa
Format
ULarge Format
Yes, also saw the Vermeer and the Frank exhibit at the Met. I've seen the the Americans exhibit previously in Chicago, 1 or two years ago.

I have a tough time with The Americans. Can't say why, except that (to me) it's a very dark depiction. Humorless. Maybe unfinished or unresolved. It's hard to go against the grain like this, but I just don't buy into the style, maybe the message as well. If things were as grim as he depicted then the society shouldn't have progressed at all since that time. Life is not that grim for all people all the time. People in any situation manage to allow some enjoyment of living into their lives. It is relative however, people leading the "good life" may not appreciate how down-and-outers can enjoy anything, but they do. I think the lack of humor is what really gets to me in those photos.

The Art Institute of Chicago should take some notes on the display of a photo show from the Met. It was well lit so there was no need to strain to see the photographs. The AIC insists on lighting a show so viewers need flashlights to see the prints.

The Vermeer exhibit was something else. He was another artist that was able to anticipate photography, as in how the light looks in different situations. Wonderfully done.
 

clay

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
1,335
Location
Asheville, N
Format
Multi Format
No doubt that 'The Americans' is dark. But I don't think its intention was to assert that our entire society was like that. I think its genius was in showing that the 50s America that was seen in the predominant visual media of the time was not representative either. Frank showed people things that they probably would rather not think or even know about. There was (and still is to a degree) a segment of society that was (is) invisible to the popular visual media.
 

fschifano

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
3,196
Location
Valley Strea
Format
Multi Format
I think you've hit the nail on the head Clay. That's exactly how I saw the exhibit. Underneath the popular representation of life in the 1950's, real life in all its messy glory was going on under the covers, unnoticed, or at least unreported, by much of the media of the times.
 

Denis K

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
237
Format
35mm
I have not been to the Met but have looked at Mr. Frank's book on numerous occasions and found it interesting. I went to the WNYC site and listed to the 33 minute interview with Mr. Frank and the curator from the Met exposition. I thought it was funny as hell. Here was a interviewer trying to act as a super intellectual and set up each question in such a way as to expose his own knowledge of photography and to seem as if he understood Mr. Franks motivation and intentions. Then Mr. Frank would invariably say, "No, that's not the way it was . . . all I wanted to do was take some pictures." Mr. Frank came across as common man, as an explorer that just happened to be there looking and seeing what he could find and uncover. The interviewer kept trying to emphasize that Mr. Frank was creating art, but instead he came back and countered that it wasn't like that at all, it was simply about finding and recording.

Denis K
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
I'm going next Sunday (will be seeing the Vermeer exhibition the same day); I'll write a few thoughts after...

Lucky, lucky bastard! :wink: Sounds like a great day. Two of my favorite creators of pictures ever. Both of them are definitely top five for me.
 

Mahler_one

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Messages
1,155
My Daughter and I saw both exhibits. Then went back to the Frank again the next day with my Wife. Most of the images are fabulous, and certainly rival those of Cartier Bresson in every way. To generalize is dangerous, but the Frank photos tend to have a more dark side while the Cartier B. are more whimsical. A "must see" if you are in NYC. Don't think twice.
 

bill h

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
364
Location
Plymouth MA
Format
Multi Format
Some good reading about the show from Mark Feeney: "The 19th century had Alexis de Tocqueville, in “Democracy in America,’’ describing and analyzing. The 20th had Frank showing and recording. An abiding sense of discovery informs “The Americans’’ - or, rather, a balance between discovery and irreducible mystery." His review in the Sunday Globe, http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_ar...bert_franks_landmark_the_americans_revisited/
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom